NEW DELHI: Proceedings against Mr, Ajitabh Bachchan under FERA have been dropped by the adudicating authority as the charges for alleged contravention of foreign exchange regulations had not been established. The Rajya Sabha was informed today, reports PTL.
The adjudicating authority held that Mr. Ajitabh Bachchan had been a “person resident outside India w.e.f. 28.286 and that the flat at Montraux (Switzerland) was purchased and fully paid for as a part of overall business arrangement between him and his employer. Archopharma, the minister of state for finance, Mr. Eduardo Faleiro, said in a written reply.
The proceedings were initiated pursuant to the issue of show cause notices by the enforcement directorate to Mr. Ajitabh Bachchan for alleged contravention of FERA.
Under Sec. 2 (Q) of FERA, 1973, a person resident outside India has been defined as a person who is not a resident in India. In terms of Sec. 2 (P) of the Act a person resident in India means a citizens of India who has been staying in India but does not include a citizen who has gone out or stays out of India for or on taking: up employment.
Foreign exchange to the tune of $1,220 was drawn by IPCA Ltd, against its blanket permit for export promotion in June 1986. This amount was utilized for Mr. Ajitabh Bachchan’s travels during that month, the minister said.
On his present status, the minister said Mr. Ajitabh Bachchan continues to be a person resident outside India.
The minister of state for finance, Mr. Ajit Panja told members that Mr. Amitabh Bachchan has declared an aggregate additional income of Rs. 30.5 lakhs’ while furnishing returns of income for the assessment years 1976-77 to 1986-87.
Mr. Panja told Mr. Chimanbhai Mehta and others in a written reply that Mr. Bachchan had not filed the returns of income under the amnesty scheme which was in operation between September 1985 and March 1987.
The minister replied in the negative when asked whether Mr. Bachchan had declared an undisclosed income of about Rs 1 corer recently.
He said pursuant to these returns, the film actor had for the first time made an application under Sec. 272A of the Income Tax Act seeking reduction or waiver of penalty and interest.
Article extracted from this publication >> September 16, 1988